Evidence of meeting #11 for Public Safety and National Security in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was side.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON
Before Mr. MacKenzie begins talking about items that happened while we were in camera, I would advise him to stick to the session that is in public.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Very well.
Mr. Chair, the Conservative side would like the opportunity to put a motion on the floor, or to at least have a discussion about a motion.
It's my understanding that there has been agreement among the parties, among the whips of the House. Certainly on our side, we would abide by the agreement the whips have come to and allow for parliamentary discussion based on the number of individuals seated in the House, which was about 50% on each side. That only makes a great deal of sense.
I think we have gone through the list of witnesses that have been provided. I think there are two that may be considered Conservative. They have no idea on that side who we really want to have at this committee. It's not their position to decide who our witnesses will be. We won't decide who their witnesses will be. There should be a discussion among all parties here about how many witnesses will appear. Adding additional days to the calendar is not what this was about. It was to decide on witnesses.
A unilateral decision from one side or the other.... They would not be very pleased if we came in and had the same type of approach, nor would I expect them to be. And I can't believe for one minute that they think we should be happy.
This is a private member's bill, obviously. The member should have some say in witnesses who should come forward. If they want to be smug and take it over and do what they're trying to do, that's fine on their side. It's certainly not parliamentary. Canadians can see. They'll hear what's going on here. There are Canadians out there who would like to have an opportunity, on both sides of the issue. We understand that not everybody agrees with our perspective, but certainly everybody out there I think will expect that there would be a fair hearing held in this place. Anything less than that is certainly not a democratic situation. It's not what Canadians expect. It's not what our colleagues in the House would expect. I'd be rather surprised, as a matter of fact, if some of the colleagues of the members opposite would be very happy to find out that this discussion is a one-sided discussion about who gets to speak and what witnesses come in here.
Mr. Chair, this defies logic. It just defies everything the people who were elected to be here are here to represent. It's why they came and why they would want to be here.
Mr. Chair, when we look at what is intended here, the motion itself is intended to shut down the opportunity for the member to bring witnesses forward to speak on behalf of her bill. Actually, there may be other people--and we don't mind that--who are going to speak against it. But they have absolutely no idea on the other side of the priorities we would have. For somebody on that side to make that decision is just not right.
Bloc
France Bonsant Bloc Compton—Stanstead, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I have just received this in English only. So I'd like this document in French, please: we're still in a bilingual country.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
I had just asked the question, I'm sure, and got the approval of the committee. Do you want me to collect...?
Bloc
France Bonsant Bloc Compton—Stanstead, QC
Yesterday, I tabled a motion and it was translated immediately. I have no desire to hear unpleasant remarks from my Conservative colleagues again. Therefore I demand that this document be made available in French as well.
Conservative
Bloc
France Bonsant Bloc Compton—Stanstead, QC
Yes, Mr. Chair.
The clerk or the researcher could have it translated into French, which would take five minutes.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
This is unusual, because I had the consent of the committee. Again, this is the second time people have challenged the chair, saying I didn't have the consent to do it.
Bloc
Bloc
Bloc
France Bonsant Bloc Compton—Stanstead, QC
Mr. Chair, we can't express our opinion until we have the sheet in front of us. In fact, it's a little difficult to guess whether it's bilingual or not if we can't see the document.
Conservative
Conservative
Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
As I understand it, this sheet was prepared by the mover of the motion, the member for Ajax--Pickering. If it's not in both official languages, I would argue that his motion is out of order.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
I want to point out that I have the consent of the committee to distribute this.
Liberal
Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON
The point I would make is that this was read orally. Because this is a matter before the committee, there is no requirement to submit anything in writing. People want it to be distributed
because people need the information on the hard copy. I have no problem with that. Unfortunately, I don't have a French version right now. There is no requirement to present things in French. I can present motions orally only. To facilitate things, I presented this paper version.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
I will ask the clerk to make a comment in regard to this, because you do have the information translated before you. Let him explain.
The Clerk of the Committee Mr. Roger Préfontaine
All the names that appear on Mr. Holland's motion are contained in the lists that were distributed. There are four lists: one for each party and one from the office of the clerk that reflects the requests we received. It's my understanding that the names of all interveners are on this list.
Bloc
